Cowboys and insurance

[Steve Bullman]

Taken from the tree surgeon insurance facebook post, discuss...

 

https://www.facebook.com/Tsins/

 

Cowboys??

We regularly get accused of insuring unqualified Tree Surgeons, Foresters and Landcapers. I can confirm categorically that we will not knowingly do this. We do ask if you and your staff are suitably qualified and trained. We also ask you to confirm that you comply with HSE guidance. We don’t ask you to send your qualifications in before you take out cover. This is the same as when you insure your car, the insurer asks if you have a valid licence but doesn’t ask to see it.

I am all for upping standards and I regularly go on about it here. Insuring unqualified people is bad enough but even worse is when these cowboys use unqualified and untrained staff. As a company we will not insure people if they refuse to take out the required Employers Liability Insurance. I believe we were one of the first brokers to take this stance yet there are several out there who still allow people to believe that a groundie can be a bona fide sub-contractor. How can this be?

If we drive up standards, the job price you guys and girls can charge will go up and the cost of insurance will go down. We need to rally the troops on this rather that criticise those who say that the your industry needs to up the game. Weed out the bad apples and everything will be much sweeter!

The HSE knowledge that people have when they have finished some courses is frequently woefully poor. There is often a stunned silence on the phone when we point out peoples’ legal obligations.

So before everybody criticises me for this post, just reflect on what is actually happening out there. And yes it is a rant but if standards are upped the ultimate winner is YOU!

The whole industry needs to evolve. So yes please add your views, let’s get the trainers involved in this debate it’s one that needs to be had. Let’s up the game, up the standards and up your profits!

 

[WesD]

I don’t think it matters what changes are made as there will always be cowboys insured or not.

 

there is only so much you can charge for Tree work to be competitive with others and I believe it’s illegal if we all got together and started price fixing. 

Domestically people don’t care what we pay to run our businesses they only care what they will be paying us. 

Commercially we now live in a world where lots of firms either want to pay you next year (slight exaggeration) or will go elsewhere for literally pounds less. 

 

It’s not just our industry either, I’m sure there are brickies, plumbers, joiners etc. out there who make a living with no quals.  

[arbogrunt]

I'm always surprised when insurance companies dont ask to see tickets and qualifications before offering cover. The truth is, if they did, they would be turning away custom. I'm sure HSE would be asking after an accident - if there are none, or they are not adequate, then the insurance company have a just excuse not to pay out. Win - Win for the insurance company.

[monkeybusiness]

I’m pretty sure that an insurance company will pay out for a 3rd party (ie public liability) or an employee claim whether the company/individual are qualified/operating to best practice or not. The fact that the insurance is in place and paid for means that the insurance company are obliged to protect the affected parties. It may be that the insurers subsequently seek to reclaim damages from the insured if they haven’t met their obligations (ie weren’t actually qualified etc) but how likely is it that the cowboy in question will have anything worth chasing?

[Stubby]

Well . I really think its time to hang up my 6 guns and take a back seat .

[onetruth]

Seems like a lot of hand-wringing by this insurance broker to me.  Why not ask for proof of qualifications or training?  

Never used them, so I don't know what questions they do actually ask when selling a policy.  "Are you suitably qualified and trained?" would just be them covering their backs, not making any effort actually find out.  

[skyhuck]

9 hours ago, onetruth said:

Seems like a lot of hand-wringing by this insurance broker to me.  Why not ask for proof of qualifications or training?  

Never used them, so I don't know what questions they do actually ask when selling a policy.  "Are you suitably qualified and trained?" would just be them covering their backs, not making any effort actually find out.  

So why are we not asked to show our licence when taking out motor insurance?

[john p]

I’ve had one tree related insurance claim, we were rolling logs down a bank into a pile on the drive, the one log that bounced over the pile hit a postie van that pulled up at that exact moment, would it have made any odds if I’d not had a saw ticket? Was stupidity on my part as opposed to lack of certification! Insurance paid out with no quibble (Tree Surgeon Insurance were the company)

[Luckyeleven]

surely with today's technology the easiest thing would be for them to ask for proof of qualification, even most baby boomers can manage to take a photo on their phone and send it via email....

Simple solution to a storm in a tea cup 

[Mark Bolam]

It’s not simple.

Proof of competency doesn’t necessarily come on a piece of paper, certainly not legally so.